Talk:The Good Life (1975 TV series)

Sexuality, strong and warm and wild and free
 Well, there were questions raised about this.207.189.98.44 21:30, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Maybe so but these questions were raised by people who wanted it to be true. It's a bit like "Reds under the bed".  If you want to find them, you will -- even if they aren't there.  The particular episode referenced by that website certainly involved flirting but, in my opinion, to extrapolate that to wife-swapping is taking it well beyond the intentions of the writers. -- Derek Ross 22:20, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Are you guys talking about the 'sexually charged relationship'? I don't remember much it. DJ Clayworth 22:24, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Yup, although I think that even 'sexually charged' is overstating things a bit. -- Derek Ross
 * What do you want to put instead?207.189.98.44
 * I'm happy to leave it. It's only overstating the situation slightly. -- Derek Ross
 * Definately not- there was a bit of mild flirting going on in lots of episodes, and one episode where they all got drunk and Jerry admitted he secretly fancied Barbara, but certainly no wife swapping, actiual or even implied quercus robur 22:11, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Wifeswapping was in fact mentioned at least twice in the show, once when Margo was simply saying how distasteful it was, and once when Jerry mentions it to Barbara when drunk. It's hard to be sure how serious he was, though. In the drunk episode, Jerry admits he fancies Barbara, but she dismisses it, and Tom tells Margo that she's a very attractive woman, and what a sexy neck she has, but otherwise it's fairly harmless, and I wouldn't say any of this merits calling their relationship 'sexually charged'. Raylin (talk) 15:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

No kids?
Neither the Goodes or the Leadbetters seemed to have kids or ever mentioned the issue? No-one seemed to have children in the world they lived in. I guess that's what gave them the time for their lifestyle experiment.

Actually yes I know they had goats! I meant children!

I always thought they seemed such a happy intimate couple, I wonder whether their lack of kids screwed up my image of a happy couple (ie no kids)


 * Didn't Barbara get pregnant in one of the last episodes? Or am I imagining that? quercus robur 09:19, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I imagined it - just watched the final episode, Barbara didn't get pregnant but Jerry got the bosses job... quercus robur 22:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Breakfast cereal
Can any one inform me if the company that Tom works for at the beginning of the series 'making plastic toys for insertion into breakfast cereal packets' is the same company that Reginald Perrin works for (Sunshine Desserts) in 'The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin' Or is this just a coincidence? Or as they say a 'transtextual element' shared between two sitcoms? Eric A. Warbuton 02:54, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I've always thought it was the same company, but I don't know for sure. I thought that Good Life was a spinoff. Anyone know? David Spector (user/talk) 15:04, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Title of the show in the U.S.
I hit the wrong button and saved my reversion before I finished my note in the edit summary line so here goes. The spelling of 'Neighbors' in the opening titles and on the DVD sets is the Americanized way without the 'U'. I checked this before reverting the article back from the changes that an anonymous user had made on this day.User:MarnetteD | Talk 04:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * As the reason for the change was a previous US Series called "The Good Life" and therefore made in the US for US audiences, I'd expect the 'neighbors' to be using the US spelling (and it did). Yanqui9 (talk) 00:15, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Other U.S. airing info
I do not have access to the book about the show that is cited in the footnotes (drat it), but I can tell you that the show was shown in the late 1970's on KRMA channel six, my local PBS station, in Denver. The way that most British shows that were not part of the national (ie Masterpiece Theater and Mystery!) airings in the 70's and 80's was as follows. A local station would purchase the rights to a given series and then could show the series between five and ten times depending on the contract. They could then renew these rights if they wished. The desire to renew would often depend on how much money a show brought in at pledge time (as an example Monty Python and Dr Who were cash raisers for years). However, in most cases after the "initial run" stations would return their tapes to Time/Life, Lionheart or whatever entity (they kept changing through the years) they had contracted with. Reaching the number of showings allowed might take a few or several years, thus, one might find a GL/GN showing after 1990 but that would be a rare thing.

When the show started coming out on VHS the episodes were not shown in series order. Each tape would have three or four episodes but they might be from any of the four series. This was frustrating but, as stated in the entry on the main page, PBS stations did start reshowing the series, but with far fewer times allowed. I hope that this info has been of some help to any who might question to edits that I made to the othe countries section. MarnetteD | Talk 02:11, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have partialy reverted the above User's edit because he has no source for her information, while the 1985 date I've got I do have a source for (and I've re-read it to make sure I read it right). MarnetteD is totally right about them only releasing certain episodes as my source also says this. --Berks105 09:47, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have a feeling the confusion between the dates is perhaps because the 1985 date refers to when it was broadcast across the whole country, not just certain areas, like Marnette D is refering to. To reflect this I have reworded the paragraph, and if MarnetteD has a source for earlier showings that can then be added aswell. --Berks105 09:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * My note above comes from the fact that I worked for KRMA on a volunteer basis in the 1980's. There was never a national airing of this series (or any UK sitcoms for that matter) on PBS in the US. Please be aware that many popular Britcoms may well have shown on all PBS stations but that does not mean that they were nationally broadcast. The TV listings for the Rocky Mountain News (one of Denver's two newspapers) for the month of November and December 1981 has episodes showing Monday thru Friday at 10pm. This series was popular here in Colorado and this pattern was repeated several times thru the 1980's. It is possible that the author of this book took what happened at WGBH (who had the closest ties to UK programming) and applied it to the whole country. Jeepers I never signed this and sinebot must not have been around a year ago so MarnetteD | Talk on or around Oct 6 2006

Link
I removed the link to The good life because I feel, as I stated in the edit history, that as the sentance already reads "sustainable, simple and self-sufficient ", all of which links to articles on the subject, a fourth link to what is basically very, very similar articles to the three in quotes above, is basically unecessary. In addition, if the link is to be added I don't think it should be done like it was, "-- in other words, the good life --", which doesn't look right. In addition, the actual article it links to I don't think is that relevant, as it seems to be merely how three authors have used the term. The sitcom did not, I believe, get its title from this from this phrase either. --Berks105 17:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for providing more detailed reasons here. I will try to explain my reasons for wanting to add this link.
 * First point: The TV programme has this title for its specific associations; it is not, for example, called A Suburban Experiment or Tom and Barbara. The phrase the good life is an ancient one, and its connotations are richly symbolic.  Any reader who is unaware of the phrase, except as the title of this series, or who is unaware of how it has been used and developed over the centuries, deserves to have a link to point it out to them.  (You say the articles are similar.  I don't find self-sufficiency much like the good life; the former is practical, the latter philosophical.)
 * Second: if you don't like the link inserted into a phrase in the middle of the sentence, I would be happy to see it elsewhere in the article.
 * Third: the wiki article as it now stands is about more than a couple of American authors, as it lists older religious and non-religious approaches. Anyway, Helen and Scott Nearing's  1954 book Living the Good Life popularised the phrase in this sense and inspired the back-to-the-landers and the 1960s hippie movement, and so in an indirect but undeniable way, fed into the culture which allowed the sitcom to be created and find its audience.
 * Is this sufficient?
 * BrainyBabe 18:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think we can easily come to a comprise here. I will try and insert it elsewhere into the article. Hope this is alright. --Berks105 18:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I have inserted as the link for the word lifestyle. I feel that as you said the article is philosophical it fits well under lifestyle. I couldn't think of a way to get it on its own in a sentance, but I hope this is alright.


 * Thank you for your consideration and for re-inserting the link to the good life. I think we are making progress towards a consensus!  However, I don't think that providing it under the word lifestyle is appropriate.  For most people, that word immediately conjures up the marketing-led meaning of consumerism, the exact opposite of what is intended, so they would not click there.  (Those readers who hover first to check out where the link goes would be in a minority, I fear.)
 * I would suggest removing the link (or changing it to go to lifestyle, if you prefer), and beginning the next sentence thus: "In pursuit of this good life, they dig up their front and back gardens..."  How does that strike you?  BrainyBabe 18:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I like that and I have added this using your exact words. Glad we sorted this out quickly and amicambly. --Berks105 18:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, well done to both of us for amicable civility. BrainyBabe 18:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Green Acres
I should think that Green Acres had more than a passing influence on this show, whaddaya say? Maikel 09:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I would disagree. I have never read anything about Green Acres and this show. It was a creation of Esmonde & Larbey, who have never stated they were influenced by any US, or indeed British, sitcom. --UpDown 09:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ditto to what UpDown has written. Just because shows have a few (in this case very few) things in common does not mean that one was influenced by the other. MarnetteD | Talk 10:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Margo's name
Of course, the question comes in because her name is not spelled in the closing credits. But be aware of these facts before adding the T. The creators of the show do not spell it with a T in their book about the show. While that should be proof enough that it should be left off other items that weigh against using it include the fact that both the VHS and DVD covers spell it without a T. When using the close captioning with either the VHS or DVD her name is spelled without a T and remember that these are put out by the BBC. With the exception of the one website that is mentioned in the edit summary by Faux01 all other websites that I have been to spell it without a T. If there is the need to reach a consensus on this among wikipedia editors I will cast my vote now for leaving the T off. MarnetteD | Talk 23:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. In "A Celebration of the Good Life", besides the authors spelling it "Margo" throughout, there are copies of scripts (p. 23) and internal BBC material (p. 38) spelling it "Margo". -- Gridlock Joe (talk) 23:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have also found a BBC website that spells it without the closing "T": . -- Gridlock Joe (talk) 23:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * If the show creators spell it without a T in their book and in both the VHS and DVD covers, then that is considered the official spelling for name and is the only one that should be used in the article. AnmaFinotera (talk) 23:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I assume this is where you were drawing the Wikiproject's attention to, MarnetteD? I agree that if the majority of the BBC sites and the writers of the programme spell her name as "Margo" then that's what it is. The rather poor new BBC Comedy Guide is the only occasion I've seen it with the 'T', and I have suspicions that those are written using Wikipedia pages as a main reference. Notably, the much better old BBC Guide to Comedy doesn't have the T either. Bob talk 00:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Goodlife.jpg
Image:Goodlife.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 23:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Done.--UpDown (talk) 08:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Past tense?
The 'Characters' section is written entirely in the past tense, but this sounds unusual to me. Shouldn't it be written in the present tense? It should also conform with the plot synopsis, which is written in the present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raylin (talk • contribs) 18:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You are quite right, it should be in the present tense.--UpDown (talk) 07:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

County
I am not going to continue this edit war with this annoying IP-address who seems to want to invent a county of "south west London" and ignores the fact everyone refers to Surbiton as Surrey, a quick Google search will prove that. His wordy version is not suitable, my simply version stating "officially Greater London" [the actual county, not a made up south west London] is far better. Other views?--UpDown (talk) 08:50, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I am that 'annoying IP-address'. Insults are not appropriate in Wikipedia. Thank your advice on creating an account; I will certainly do so when I am ready. For the meantime I will follow the advice that 'Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit' with or without an account. It seems from your own talk page that you enjoy starting edit wars and arguments - that is not helpful and not in the spirit of Wikipedia. You may not be familar with the place, but south west London is clearly not made up - on the Surbiton article you can clearly see that it is in the 'South West' London Assembly constituency. The Surbiton article, and indeed the Surrey article will also tell you that Surbiton is not in Surrey, despite what you may think. My 'wordy version' as you so tactfully put it, was designed to appease you by mentioning that in the sitcom Surrey is occasionally mentioned. If it were up to me, Surrey would not be in the article at all.91.107.44.86 (talk) 17:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I will just point out that even after 1965, "SURBITON, Surrey" was used in postal addresses (see Postal counties of the United Kingdom). This continued until the Royal Mail abandoned the use of counties in the 1990s.  So when the TV series was made, it was quite common to refer to Surbiton as being in Surrey. JonH (talk) 17:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Common, maybe, but inaccurate nevertheless. Postal counties were never intended to be geographic definitions, but simply routing instructions. I do wish someone would stop changing this page, and attempting to change the facts. The editing is also amusingly inconsistent, as by this reckoning Northwood should be described as 'Middlesex' not 'North London', which would only further the inaccuracy. I also think that 'south west London' rather than 'Greater London' (which is equivalent to 'London' - see Greater London article) is a better way of describing Surbiton in this article, because it highlights the distance away from Northwood, where the show was filmed.Uakari (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Over the Rainbow?
I'd never realized that this was what Tom whistled! Seems so obvious now that I think about it. Orellette (talk) 02:12, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Location
I have corrected the reference to the location filming which was inaccurately stated as being on the present site of St Martins Pre School in Moor Park Road. To substantiate this I have included the Google street view link in Kewferry Road where it can be clearly seen that it is the same pair of houses. In an episode where Barbara chases a goat up the street the street sign "Ebury Close" can be clearly seen next to Margo's house (the sign is now overgrown in the current streetview but of course the name is on the map). Moor Park Road is only a few hundred yards away but I can see no reason to include a link to the pre-school stub article as neither the school nor the building have any connection to the sitcom. oops - forgot to sign! Baldy Bill (talk) 21:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Self-sufficient or self-employed?
Despite the stated premise of the show, the Goods are never really self-sufficient. They barter for what they need, get some stuff for free, and they rely on city services for water and sewer. (A few episodes in, they begin to make their own electricity.)

In truth, the Goods are self-employed. Their farms (backyard, front yard, and an allotment) produce items which they either barter or sell for hard currency.

A true self-sufficient operation would not need input from any outside source, hence the definition. "Sir" (Andrew, Tom's former boss) has a much better chance at self-sufficiency with the farm he intends to set up, as mentioned in (I believe it was) the final episode "Anniversary". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:2D1F:B5E8:858:CA34:5705:9057 (talk) 05:43, 26 December 2019 (UTC)